The reason the Creedmoor was created and the reason it is so popular is because it fixes all the shortcomings of the 260 rem when a magazine that limits the cartridge over all length is to be used. It also seems the shorter and fatter the cartridge the more inherently accurate it tends to be. This is a no-brainer for me Creedmoor all the way. Now if we are talking about a rifle with no magazine OAL restriction and the person is a hand loader only then the 260 may have its place.
I honestly wouldn't know how accurate this information is.
What I do know is that Hornady invested deep into developing and marketing the 6.5 Creedmore, in conjunction with Ruger's intro of the RPR. While the two cartridges are literally one right after the other in Hornady's newest 10 Edition Handloading Manual, that manual goes out of its way to demonstrate the Creedmore as a superior round.
Which it is not.
First, Hornady orders the two cartridges 260 first, 6.5CM second, giving the false impression that the 260 has the smaller case capacity. It has the larger capacity.
Next, it shows the 6.5CM having superior velocities with the same bullet, but for the comparison, the powders chosen for the 260 are not the ideal ones that are chosen for the so-similar 6.5CM. H-4350 doesn't even appear in the 260 section and that's just flatly ludicrous.
The rifles used show the .260 in a Rem 700, and the 6.5CM in a Rem 700/
Custom. Experienced shooters know that custom bores can have different diameters than standard production bores, and that this can heavily influence velocity outcomes.
In reality, the 260 gives at least 50FPS more velocity than the 6.5CM for a given bullet, given identical conditions. On first glance, this may not seem like any real difference, but when handloading, one can load the 260 to lower pressures than the 6.5CM and still get identical performance, and this can have big benefits in bore longevity.
Now some might suggest that this makes the 6.5CM
the more efficient cartridge. In my book that simply means that 'the more efficient cartridge' needs to be hot rodded in order to match the 'comparable' cartridge's performance; and that's never good news for fans of bore longevity.
So the deck is stacked in the Hornady manual in favor of the 6.5CM which was developed in-house at Hornady. An experienced reloader will recognize this after just a few minutes worth of paging back and forth in the book. That's what I did when I was looking for an actually good reason to adopt the 6.5CM anyway. But it just didn't stand up, not even on paper.
Compare this with Remingtons's proven track record of abandoning its own chamberings to lingering death in the marketplace.
Now don't get me wrong, they are both excellent choices; and for the newer 6.5 shooter, the 6.5CM makes a lot of sense. But it makes little sense to switch from the 260 to the 6.5CM. The 260 is just the superior cartridge. It would be just like giving the family cow away for some magic beans.
Years of shooting F Open has demonstrated to all that the 260 leaves some gold on the table to the 6.5-284. But the 6.5-284 is a barrel burner where the 260 gives far more reasonable bore life. I'm still shooting the custom 260 barrel that I first installed in around 2003-2004, and it's got several full seasons of 1000yd F open competition at Bodines in it. A 6.5-284 would have probably required replacement before getting half way through the second season.
Yes, the 260 might benefit from some small case capacity increase. But it would not benefit from any capacity decrease, which is precisely what the 6.5CM offers.
Accuracy wise, the edge goes to the better ammunition maker, not to either one of the chamberings.
As for magazine length arguments, this was already covered in my prior posting. Likewise for any scarcity of excellent 260 factory match offerings.
Don't take any of this on my word. Read the book.
Choose whichever chambering makes the best sense
to you, but get the basic facts right, too.
Greg
PS Cody, this is not some personal issue between you and me. I just happen to have over15 years of experience with the 260 and think that it's currently undergoing same artificial stress as part of a marketing strategy in favor of the 6.5CM; and so I felt that we all just needed to get our facts straight if we wanted to make the comparison in real terms.